"And I have never claimed they are"
Yes you have - you made the point that they were "legal" after it had been pointed out to you that they had been used in built-up areas.
The obscene fact that they are legal in some circumstances has never been in question.
Your declaring they were, coupled with your comparing them to early nineteenth century and calling into question that they have ever been used or were the result of Hamas 'friendly fire' all constitutes support for their use.
Are you ever going to explain why you should adopt the role of spokesman for a terrorist state which has never suggested any of the above.
You are a fanatical Sickophant
Jim Carroll